Although I may add to this subject later, this will be my final study of this series at this time. Because of men’s attitudes and self-serving traditions, women have been abased, abused, forced into prostitution, abandoned with their children to fend for themselves and generally kept from satisfying their hopes of personal reward and life’s fulfillment. Yet, no matter how we interpret the two creation stories of Genesis 1 and 2, there is absolutely no foundation for a hierarchy built into the male/female relationship. Therefore, God couldn’t have invented patriarchy or complementarianism, which is believed by so many modern Christians to be divinely established from the beginning of creation. Even if we hold to the position that Genesis 1:27 shows God created the man and the woman on the sixth day, something which I take issue with in previous studies, there is no evidence of a hierarchy between the man and the woman (husband and wife). Therefore, patriarchy must have come after the Fall and is an invention of man!
After God created man in chapter one of Genesis, not only did he create both male and female in the image of God (Genesis 1:27), but he also gave male and female five directives: 1) be fruitful; 2) multiply; 3) fill the earth; 4) subdue it; and 5) and have dominion over the fish of the sea, the fowl of the air and everything that moves upon the face of the earth (Genesis 1:28). All five directives are given in the plural form. This means either both men and women were given the same directives and authority over God’s creation, or, as I argue in previous studies, the man (singular) is addressed as male/female (Genesis 1:27), a plurality of gender. Therefore, no matter how we wish to interpret the Genesis 1 account of creation, no hierarchy is alluded to in the Lord’s creation of male and female (Genesis 1:28).
In the Bible’s second account of creation (Genesis 2), once again hierarchy is never alluded to in the relationship of the man and the woman. The man was formed from the ground (Genesis 2:7), but the woman was formed from what God had taken out of the man (Genesis 2:21-22). Although some try to point to hierarchy here, because the woman was taken out of the man, such an idea, however, is pure conjecture. Why would the fact that the woman was taken from the man suggest inferiority, when the man was taken from the ground? Which, on the face, is more demeaning? Nevertheless, through the operation of God, the man shared his life and part of his person, to build what became the woman. Did the very same life of the man become inferior, simply because it now beats in the heart of the woman? Did the thing, which God removed from the man, somehow become inferior, because it was used to form the woman? She was made of the same flesh and bone that made up what was Adam (Genesis 2:23), and the life that ran through his veins, also ran through the woman’s. According to the text, they were ONE flesh (Genesis 2:24), in the same sense that God (plural) was ONE Lord (Deuteronomy 6:4). What do we find here that is unequal? Where is there room for hierarchy in the male/female relationship in the Genesis 2 record?
Not until we come to Genesis 3:16 do we find any evidence of hierarchy in the relationship between the man and the woman. Nevertheless, all the Lord did here was tell the woman what would be the consequences of her sin. Nothing there is said of the Lord inventing patriarchy or making the woman inferior in authority with respect to her husband. What the Lord told the woman was, as a result of her rebellion, her desire would be toward her husband (to please him?), and he would dominate her. Therefore, patriarchy/hierarchy in the male/female relationship is the result of the Fall, and is the man’s, vis-à-vis the male’s, invention.
Thus, we have no evidence that patriarchy (hierarchy in the relationship between the man and the woman) was something God initiated from the beginning. On the contrary, the male and female represent the image of God (Genesis 1:27), and there is no hierarchy within the Godhead. Genesis 1 reveals that male and female were given authority over all of what God had created, and there is no evidence that their authority wasn’t shared equally, nor is there any evidence of either having authority over the other.
On the other hand, the Genesis 2 account does reveal differences. Differences of origin, and differences in time, as that relates to the beginning of the man and the woman. Yet, the conclusion of the matter is that, although they are male and female, they are one flesh, and ultimately have the same origin (Genesis 2:23-24).
Smoodock's Blog 
6 responses to “Patriarchy Is an Invention of Man”
Greetings Eddie! I have refrained from commenting on this study but I am going to now. I agree that man has traditionally debased women and that marriage is an equal partnership.
Yet, Christianity certainly hold women in a place of esteem, especially compared with other religions; i.e. Sharia Law. I must not understand the concept of complementarianism because I do believe women and men complement each other. Their traits are different, and together they make a whole. I never make a decision on my own and without my wife’s agreement.
I also agree that some of the best preachers and teachers I have set under are women! Yet, probably due to my upbringing I would have difficulty sitting under a pastor that was female. This is also due to my experience with such. But this is strictly a personal predjudice and nothing more.
The Old Testament practice of polygamy and God’s tolerance (not approval) has always been a puzzle to me.
Further, I think that the uniqueness of man and woman in making a complete whole renders same sex couples very much lacking.
Best to you Eddie!
Greetings Dave, and thanks for reading, especially for your honesty in taking it in.
I would be among the first to admit that the Islamic males treat their women much worse than Christian men, but the gravity of their sin doesn’t excuse ours. The scriptures tell us that comparing ourselves among ourselves isn’t wise. Our model is Christ. With Christ in view, we are humbled and tend to obey. However, if we compare ourselves with others, more often than not we’ll excuse ourselves and condemn those who are worse (outwardly) than we are.
Indeed, men and women are different and compliment one another. We were created that way. As a rule women are more tender than men, and men are more direct and forceful. There are exceptions, but this can pretty much characterize our differences. Moreover, as a rule the more direct and forceful male will tend to bully the more tender female. Again, a rule but with exceptions, and I speak here of personal experience, unhappy to admit.
Personally, I have sat under only one woman preacher, she was an assistant pastor. I like her viewpoint on the scriptures. It was always with a little surprise, because she tended to expand what I held to be true. We know in part, so it is always good and fulfilling to have the little we understand expanded. When I came to her to resign my place as a Sunday school teacher, I felt I had to apologize to her, because she was recently placed in charge of that department. I believe the apology came off negatively, and there was nothing I could say to change that. Had a man been the head, I never would have apologized. I would have merely stated my reasons and been done with it. Not wanting to be bigoted in this sense often backfires. She was very gracious, but I’m sure my apology accused me of what I claimed it was not.
I had been very troubled for a long time over polygamy in both the Old and New Covenants (consider Paul’s command that an elder have only one wife). Then I realized that Christ, the Husband of the Church, permitted his wife (the Church) to come to a better understanding by walking with him. Repentance takes time to accomplish its perfect work.
I admit to being very troubled over same sex couples. I have a study series on this subject, but even today I wonder about how I ended the series. I’m not certain I was as merciful as I should have been in my conclusion… still wondering, still seeking.
Lord bless you Dave. Thanks for your comment.
Hello Eddie, I really enjoyed what you wrote. Because “hierarchy” means “holy rule” , it IS present in Genesis 3 but I believe it is God’s holy rule promised to Israel. “He will rule over you” points towards God creating a people for His own special possession. It is imperative, it absolutely crucial that He does this – We learn in Leviticus that blood sacrifices of animals had to come from a domesticated animal, it couldn’t just be a wild animal, because it had to COST the giver something. God’s own people would eventually give birth to God’s own Son. I know many people read the laws towards women in the OT as biased or unbalanced but ALL of that language, incrementally yet eventually, gets turned upon God’s wife, His covenant people. Isreal has to come to terms with the fact they are not the husband in this relationship to God. All that language that seems to be a higher bar for females to obey or to be under authority or to always be at risk for divorce; even all those verses about a “quarrelsome wife” in the book of Proverbs, God’s covenant nation, as His wife, is guilty of ALL OF IT. Regardless, He calls her back over and over because she HAS to be HIS own possession, she cannot be wild, so that He could send His very OWN sacrifice to shed blood and save the whole world. Anyway, He will rule over You is God’s Holy Rule of Isreal and, in my opinion, that is the only way this is Good News for both males and females.
Greetings Carolyn, and thank you for your encouragement and for reading my studies. Lord bless you.
While I agree with you concerning Israel being the Lord’s “wife”, I hesitate to agree with your analysis of Genesis 3. Adam lied to the woman, and conspired to use her as a kind of “lab rat” to test God’s word about the Tree of Knowledge. Instead of trusting that the Lord was good, and wouldn’t lie to man, the woman believed Adam and ate of the tree and gave to him. The woman’s punishment was that her husband (as a rule) would rule over his wife, just as Adam “ruled” his wife’s behavior in the Garden. I believe this is where Patriarchy truly began. It was the woman’s choice to believe her husband over God, so she would be ruled by the man (as a rule) believing him about her place in the family and society. I don’t see Genesis 3:16 pointing to the woman desiring God, and God ruling her. Rather, her desire will be to please her husband, and he will take advantage of her desire and rule over her.
Thanks again, Carolyn for reading my studies and for your comment. My the Lord richly bless you.
Hello Eddie, this is such a timely piece of writing. A little background, I used to walk up to a female soldier daily and say “you are #@&* my Army”. Eventually, I became infamous on both sides of the Atlantic for hating women soldiers. The Lord, I’m convinced, has a tremendous sense of humor. Now a senior NCO and in charge of an all male detail providing military honors to deceased soldiers, one day another NCO locked himself into the Arms Room cage before telling me that a replacement soldier was a woman (so I wouldn’t kill him). Eventually, 8 of 10 soldiers were female, a total of 28 women over a 3 year 227 funeral span. It changed my whole life.
After retirement I wound up a social worker, the only male in a shelter for abused women, and I worked from 11PM-8AM. Then, my wife and I became house parents for first-time single moms and their child for three years, Then, after moving to Vietnam, I started teaching to English to a student body that was nearly 100% female and had teaching colleagues in the same percentage! The Lord led me through all of that to a point that included me being identified as a valuable women’s advocate. I have thought through most of the topics you’ve recently been “blogging” about. And with respect to pretty much everything I’ve read, it was like an echo of thoughts I’ve experienced myself becoming visible before my eyes. Oswald Chambers writes often about “the mainspring” and that humanity’s has been put out of whack (my terminology) since the Fall. One of the most grotesque consequences of the Fall of mankind is the subsequent mistreatment of whomever is different, whomever presents a threat to superiority, and/or of whomever disagrees with “whatever”, e.g. women were not created to be your doormat/punching bag/cook & bottlewasher, etc. I wholeheartedly agree that men intentionally created patriarchy, the reason(s) only matter with respect to understanding the mechanics of how this came to be, in my opinion. What’s crucial is getting it corrected and aligned with God’s original intent! [in my opinion ;)]. For me, these blogs have put some teeth to what I’ve been wrestling with for a long time. And, in the place where I serve there is a unique opportunity to set “the record” straight without the chaos that can often accompany such a situation. Another consequence of the Fall is many/most of us do not respond to a different way of thinking easily! Be blessed!